Monday, March 25, 2013

2013 Opening Day Preview, Part 4.

#10: Alex Gordon

It sound weird to say this, given all the drama and agitas that accompanied Gordon’s first four years in the majors, but at this point, he
seems to me to be one of the most reliable and consistent players on the entire
roster.

Last year he hit .294/.368/.455, and there’s no reason why
he can’t sustain that performance. His numbers were all down slightly from
2011, but the only real difference was that he turned nine home runs into a
triple and six more doubles. If you just take out his 2009-2010 seasons, his
career looks like a smooth progression from College Player of the Year to Minor
League Player of the Year to decent rookie to promising sophomore to, finally,
a true major league star. He’s 29 years old now, but given that he’s a fitness
freak, given his skill set (both power and speed), and given the position he
plays, he’s probably a better bet to age gracefully into his 30s than anyone
else on the team.

For what it’s worth, he’s raking in spring training, against
relatively high-caliber competition. (His “opposition quality” metric at
baseball-reference, a new stat that weights playing time in spring training
against the opposition you face – so that we can differentiate the player who’s
performing well against guys who were in A-ball last year – is 9.4, which is
almost major-league quality. Most players have a rating between 8 and 9.)

And it’s time to finally ask the question: is Alex Gordon
the most underrated player in baseball?

As Exhibit A, the prosecution presents the following list,
of the players with the most Wins Above Replacement over the last two years:

Player bWAR

Justin
Verlander 15.9

Ryan Braun
14.5

Miguel Cabrera 14.2

Ben Zobrist
14.0

Robinson Cano 13.4

Alex Gordon
13.3

Dustin Pedroia 12.5

Clayton Kershaw 12.5

Cliff Lee 12.5

Andrew
McCutchen 12.3

Adrian Beltre 12.3

Over the last two years, Alex Gordon has been the sixth-best
player in the major leagues. But if you were to ask the casual fan, I doubt
he’d make the list of the six best players in the AL Central. And frankly, the
writers aren’t much better. In 2011, Gordon got three 10th-place votes for AL
MVP. Last year, he got none. In neither year did he make the All-Star team.
Josh Hamilton was the starting left fielder for the AL both years. Aside from
the fact that Hamilton played nearly as much center field as left field the
last two years, Hamilton’s value over the last two years combined (6.9 bWAR) was less than Gordon’s value in 2011 alone (7.1
bWAR).

Go to your average fan and assert that Alex Gordon is a
better ballplayer than Josh Hamilton. Wait for the laughter to die down. It may
take a while.

In The New Bill James
Historical Baseball Abstract, James writes this under the entry for Darrell
Evans, who he ranked as the 10th-best third baseman of all time:

“Darrell Evans is, in
my opinion, the most underrated player in baseball history, absolutely number
one on the list. There are at least ten characteristics of an underrated player:

1. Specialists and
players who do two or three things well are overrated; players who do several
things well are underrated.

4. Players who play
for championship teams are often overrated; players who get stuck with bad
teams are often underrated.

5. Players who play in
New York and LA are sometimes overrated, while players who play in smaller and
less glamorous cities are sometimes underrated, although this factor is not as
significant as many people believe it to be.

6. Players who are
glib and popular with the press are sometimes overrated, while players who are
quiet are sometimes underrated, although, again, this factor is not as
significant as many people think it is.

7. Players who play in
parks which do not favor their skills are always underrated. Players who play
in parks which favor them – hitters in Colorado, lefties in Yankee, pitchers in
the Astrodome – are always overrated.

8. Hitters from
big-hitting eras (the 1890s, the 1920s and 1930s) are overrated in history, and
pitchers from the dead ball era and the 1960s are overrated. Pitchers from the
big-hitting era and hitters from the 1960s are underrated.

10. Anything which
“breaks up” a player’s career tends to cause him to be underrated. A player who
has a good career with one team will be thought of more highly than a player
who does the same things, but with three different teams. Switching positions
causes a player to be underrated. A player who plays 1,000 games at third base
and 1,000 games at second base may be underrated, because it’s harder to form a
whole image of what he has done.”

Let’s go through the list one by one.

1. Gordon’s skill set is extremely diverse. He hits home
runs but not a lot of home runs. He led the league in doubles last year. He
draws walks. He hits for a high average. He plays great defense. He doesn’t
ground into a lot of double plays. He doesn’t have one signature skill; his
signature is that he has a lot of skills.

2. Gordon has actually hit for a good average the last two
years, but had never hit above .260 before that; his career average is still
just .269.

3. Gordon has been the leadoff hitter for most of the last
two years, which of course means he’s going to score runs more than he’ll drive
them in. He has 159 RBIs the last two years, but 194 runs scored.

4. Check.

5. Check.

6. Gordon is a very pleasant individual and certainly not
combative with the media, but he’s a man of few words.

7. Kauffman Stadium is not a pitchers’ park overall, but it
is a very tough park for power hitters, which cuts against Gordon’s primary
skill when he reached the majors, and forced him to adjust his batting approach
as a result.

8. Not really relevant, since we’re talking about a player
who’s underrated in his own era.

9. A significant amount of Gordon’s value is in his defense
– he’s won Gold Gloves the last two years, and deservedly so – and that’s a big
reason why his overall value is not appreciated.

10. Gordon’s career has been broken up by his struggles in
2009 and 2010, which included a position switch and a remedial course in the
minor leagues. I suspect a big part why he’s so underrated is simply that
people have the Gordon of 2007-2010 in mind when they think of him. And because
he was so highly touted, I think his failures hit people harder – he was
already written off as a bust before he turned his career around.

In essence, Gordon is the best example of the Post-Hype
Sleeper in baseball today.

So what we have is a player who’s a top-ten value in all of
baseball even though no one thinks of him that way, and who ticks off pretty
much every box on the How To Be
Underrated At Baseball checklist. Does that mean Gordon’s the most
underrated player in the game?

No, because of the guy two slots ahead of him on the list
above. Ben Zobrist might have a lower Q rating than even Gordon, even though
Zobrist has been a better player for a lot longer. Gordon, at least, was the #2
overall pick out of college and the best prospect in the game once upon a time.
Zobrist was a sixth-round pick, and while he hit .318 in the minors, his career
high in home runs was seven. In his
first shot at the majors, he hit .224/.260/.311; the following year, in 97
at-bats he hit .155. (And in one of the worst moves of my fantasy career, I
released him from my Stratomatic team after his sophomore season. Oops.)

Since then Zobrist has hit .267/.367/.462. He plays for Tampa Bay, so while
he’s played for a perennial contender, he also plays in one of the worst
markets in the game and in a ballpark
which masks his excellence. Gordon has changed positions once in his career;
Zobrist changes positions once or twice a week, and has legitimate Gold Glove
talent in both right field and second base, which is an exceptionally rare
skill set. Gordon makes around $10 million a year on his long-term contract;
Zobrist makes $5.5 million this year, with club options for $7 million and $7.5
million for 2014 and 2015.

So no, Alex Gordon is not the most underrated player in baseball.
He might be the second-most, though.

#9: Second Baseman

I am slightly disappointed but not the least bit surprised
that the Royals have selected Chris Getz to start at second base over Johnny
Giavotella. I think Giavotella is the better player, because he’s a career
.331/.397/.477 hitter in Triple-A, and because he’s only played 99 games in the
major leagues, and because he’s nearly four years than Chris Getz, who by the
way still has never hit a home run in
the three years and 254 games he’s played for the Royals.

Am I 100% certain this is the wrong decision? No. I can’t
deny that in his 376 plate appearances in the majors, Giavotella has hit
.242/.271/.340, which is even worse than Getz’s career line of .257/.314/.316.
Getz does have some other inherent advantages. He bats left-handed, which
provides some lineup balance, because of the other eight starters, five bat
right-handed, and only Gordon, Hosmer, and Moustakas bat from the left side.
Having six right-handed bats approaches the point of being a tactical
disadvantage*.

Getz is also a better baserunner (probably 2-3 runs over the
course of a season) and a better defender. The defensive advantage is probably
overstated, not because Giavotella is great – he isn’t – but because Getz is
only average at best himself. Baseball Info Solutions has Giavotella at 5 runs
below average in his career (about 9 runs over a full season), but they also
have Getz at 17 runs below average in his career, which is around 6 or 7 runs a
year. He looks like Frank White when put next to Yuniesky Betancourt, which is
why the perception in Kansas City is that he’s a well-above average defender.

*: I’ve mentioned this
right/left balance problem before, and in writing this it occurred to me – this
wouldn’t be such a problem if the Royals had a switch-hitter or two in their
lineup, and it feels like they always used to have at least one.

So I checked, and…it’s
true. Since Willie Wilson entered the lineup in 1978, the Royals had at least
one switch-hitter play 95 or more games EVERY YEAR from 1978 to 2004. They
weren’t always good – David Howard was the sole entry in 1995 – but there was
always at least one. Wilson, UL Washington, Kurt Stillwell, Brian McRae, Felix
Jose, Jose Offerman, and Carlos Beltran helped keep the lineup balanced. As
recently as 1997, the Royals had three switch-hitters in their lineup –
Offerman, Chili Davis, and Bip Roberts.

But since 2004, only
two switch-hitters have played in 95 games: Alberto Callaspo in 2009, and Melky
Cabrera in 2011. (Wilson Betemit came close.) I don’t know if the Royals just
got lucky all those years, but they could really use a guy like that in their
lineup. Just another reason to love Adalberto Mondesi.

Anyway, I think going with Getz is a mistake, but I’m not
certain. What I’m certain about is that I shouldn’t have to be uncertain. Last
year the Royals gave Yuniesky Betancourt 43 starts at second base, almost all
of them while Giavotella languished in Omaha. Give that playing time to
Giavotella, and either he would have hit (and wouldn’t have had to fight for a
job this spring) or he wouldn’t (and we’d have more confidence that Getz is the
right choice.) The bad decisions of years past continue to echo in 2013, when
they might actually matter.

The good news is that whether Getz hits or not, the Royals
are almost certain to get a better performance overall at second base than they
did last year. Last year, Royals’ second basemen combined to hit
.256/.289/.359, and that includes Irving Falu’s fluky 18-for-50 performance at
the position. But even worse, they combined to be 15 runs below average on defense.
Thanks go yet again to Yuni, who in barely a quarter season’s worth of playing
time managed to be 10 runs below average by himself. It’s almost as if letting
the worst defensive shortstop in the majors play second base on a bad ankle is
a terrible idea.

If Getz doesn’t hit, they’ll give Giavotella another shot,
and if they don’t because he’s not hitting or because he’s traded, they’ll give
playing time to Falu, or Miguel Tejada, or Christian Colon. Regardless, it will
be hard for them to get a worse performance from second base than they did in
2012. Even if it looks like they’re going to try.

#8: James Shields

I’ve explored every angle of Shields already, so there’s not
much more to say. If he’s healthy he’ll be valuable. How valuable he is comes
down to 1) whether he can avoid the extremely poor results on BABIP that he had
in 2010 and 2) whether his significant home/road splits throughout his career
in Tampa Bay are exaggerated.

He has a 3.89 career ERA, and I think expecting 200 innings
and an ERA around 3.9 is realistic. That makes him a valuable pitcher, and
probably the best one on the Royals. It doesn’t make him an ace, or a
game-changer, or worth a top-five prospect in all of baseball. If he can get
that ERA down to 3.15, his mark over the last two years, then we’re talking.

#7: Mike Moustakas

There’s a limit to how valuable you can be when you play a
corner position and have an OBP south of .300. To his credit, Moustakas
approached that limit, contributing in other ways – 34 doubles, 20 homers, and
stellar defense which may have been the most shocking (in a good way)
development of the season.

There’s almost certain to be some improvement going forward.
Moustakas is just 24 – he turns 25 in September – and the vast majority of
players who establish themselves as an everyday player in the majors by the
time they’re 23 will improve over the next 3-4 years. How much improvement is
the question. Moustakas was worth nearly 3 bWAR last year because of his
defense, but between the fact that he’s never fielded that well before, and the
fact that defensive skills erode earlier than offensive ones, we have to assume
he won’t be quite that good with the glove going forward.

There is also the matter of a knee injury last season, which
he quietly played through even though he hit just .201/.262/.316 from August
10th on. Prior to that point, he was hitting .260/.312/.455. His perseverance
is admirable, but the fact is that you’re probably not helping your team much
when you hit .201, even if you are playing great defense. If the Royals could
get a .260/.312/.455 line from Moustakas over the entire season this year,
they’d take that, with a hope of further improvement to come.

For all the attention Eric Hosmer gets as the key to the
Royals’ future, it’s quite possible that Moustakas will have the better career
owing to his position and defense. And while neither one is likely to sign a
long-term deal that buys out free agency years, owing to the fact that Scott
Boras is their agent, I’d place Moustakas’ odds of such a deal at “slim”, not
“none”. He already turned down Boras’ advice once, agreeing to the Royals’ $4
million offer out of the draft at the last moment. He’s not giving the Royals
the Salvador Perez treatment, but I wouldn’t be shocked if the Royals were able
to buy out one year and get him signed through 2018 by next winter. I’m sure
they’d like to, as otherwise they’re looking at the specter of losing both
Moustakas and Hosmer in the same off-season.

#6: Lorenzo Cain

I feel like Cain is talked about less than anyone else in the
lineup, even the second base mess. It’s understandable given that he couldn’t
stay healthy last year; once you get that injury-prone label it’s hard to
break. On the other hand, Cain played a full season in Omaha in 2011, and
played 127 games at three different levels in 2010. Since turning pro, the only
other season he didn’t play at least 125 games (remember, minor league seasons
run only 140 games) was 2009. Hopefully, last year was a fluke.

It’s also worth remembering that in 110 career games in the
majors, Cain has hit .281/.327/.412. He has some pop (21 doubles, 8 homers) and
a lot of speed (17-for-18 in steal attempts). He has a very good defensive
reputation, and the numbers suggest that “very good” is an understatement: he’s
been worth 19 runs above average in basically two-thirds of a full season.

Put it this way: you know how much I/we rave about Salvador
Perez? How the mind boggles at the fact that in 115 career games, Perez has
been worth 4.2 bWAR, which is practically an MVP-caliber pace? Well, in 110
career games, Cain has been worth 4.0 bWAR.

No, I don’t think that’s sustainable, because I don’t think
his defensive numbers are sustainable. But be honest: you didn’t know he had
been that effective in his career. I sure didn’t, and I get not paid to know
this stuff.

Cain turns 27 next month – the most common age for a career
year. If he stays healthy, that Torii Hunter vibe he gives off at the plate may
reflect itself on the stat sheet as well. If you’re looking for a reason to
believe that the conventional wisdom on the 2013 Royals is wrong, look no
further than a breakout season from The Painkiller.

5) Frenchy - diff between best and worst outcome not as great as 1-4, but Royals are dependent upon improved performance from 2012 b/c they have no other good RF options.4) Davis - One of two wild cards in the rotation. Does Davis' 2012 performance in relief translate to rotation? Or does he revert back to Bruce Chen+ type numbers?3) Salvy - Royals need him to be as good as he has been, but small sample size of games leads to some mystery over whether he can produce at the same rate over the entire season. Also, its important that he stays healthy -- better backup options than last year, but still large drop off. 2) Santana - If we get Santana circa 2010-2011, then the trade was a coup. Not so much if we get the 2012 version = Sanchez V.21) Hosmer - Royals fielding an above avg. lineup almost entirely rests upon Hosmer being 2011 + improvement and ultimately an All-Star caliber raking first basemen. Not the 2012 out machine.

5. Perez - I don't think Rany can fathom Perez not being really good. Others are the ones with questions about him.

4. Santana - Most expect as bad as last year or in between last year and previous good ones. If he can be closer to the better seasons, they might have something. But it's hard to imagine him being all that good.

3. Davis - If his K-rate spike can translate into being a more effective starter (sort of like Greinke did after returning from the bullpen), maybe we have a real #2.

2. Francoeur - The difference between the '11 and '12 versions is five wins.

1. Hosmer - obviously. The reason I didn't want them to trade Myers is that they needed Myers or Hosmer (if not both) to be great to contend consistently. By trading Myers, they have bet it all on Hosmer. They absolutely must be right. They can have a good offense if he takes a step up from his rookie year. They will not score enough if he is as bad as last year.

I know we're supposed to be past this, but I just cannot read this without thinking how much easier it would be to find someone to replace Shields value than to find another Myers to replace Francoeur.

We don't have more Myers' in the pipeline, but we do have several potential Shields a season or two away: Zimmer, Duffy, Paulino, Lamb, Montgomer (?yeah I know), Odorizzi, Ventura and I'm sure I've left out a couple or more.

But potential OF studs? No, just a couple of 4th and 5th OFs in camp and a guy in A ball who hits but doesn't walk.

Also discouraging is that GMDM+ cannot or will not see that spending time grooming Getz will only get them a below average 2B while putting that same emphasis and support to Gio can get them an above average 2B. It's not guaranteed with Gio, but Getz' ceiling is to be below average - maybe merely replacement value. Why would they ensure that they will have someone in their lineup that MUST be replaced? Arggh!

I read that Mendoza will be the 5th starter and Chen to the pen. This puts Hochevan and Chen there, then. Relief was a strength. Adding 2 mediocre, or less, starters would seem to dilute the talent quite a bit.

Troy: Obviously Rany is engaged in a bit of obfuscation regarding Hamilton and Gordon, and if you look at their fWAR numbers over the past two seasons the separation is less dramatic. Yes, Hamilton is an exceptional player, and, yes, much of Gordon's excess value as measured by WAR is eaten up by playing time (i.e. Hamilton's injuries) and defensive effectiveness (i.e. Hamilton is not a center fielder), but those are important considerations -- durability and defensive prowess -- when constructing a winning baseball team, and they should be reflected in each player's estimated overall value.

And besides all that, Rany's point is still well taken: Gordon is durable, an excellent defender and an all-around contributor on offense, and as both bWAR and fWAR show, that skill set is extremely valuable to baseball teams, though as All Star and MVP voting demonstrate, the gap between actual value and perceived value among fans and baseball writers can be quite large.

And just because I have nothing better to do, let's keep talking about Hamilton a bit.

I fully expect that a move to RF in Anaheim will improve his overall value as he should at least be an average defender there and might even be a plus defender, though modestly so. But his offensive numbers won't look as pretty either. Hamilton's home/road splits are not terrible, but they are striking, as for his career he looks like 2012 Robinson Cano (330/370/560'ish) while in Arlington and then 2012 Yoenis Cespedes (290/350/500'ish) on the road. Both are valuable, obviously (particularly because Cespedes calls Oakland home), but one is otherworldly while the other is just quite good. Maybe Anaheim won't effect him that much, but expectations for Hamilton's offense should probably be tempered a bit moving forward. He'll still be an exceptional base runner and a crazy powerful man, but his escalating strike out numbers are not encouraging, nor is his move away from Arlington.

True, I hadn't factored in the positional,adjustment, but Hamilton played roughly 40% of his games in LF already, and now I admit that I have no interest in figuring out how his offensive value will be affected by the full time shift to a corner outfield position.